A longitudinal, controlled study of patient complaints following treated mild traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study provided 3-month follow-up data to a previous paper that compared symptom complaints of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) with those of non-injured control participants within 1 month of injury. The 110 MTBI patients and 118 control participants were group-matched on age, gender, education level, and socioeconomic status. As a group, MTBI patients no longer endorsed significantly more symptoms (M = 14.09, S.D. = 10.77) than did the control group (M = 12.56, S.D. = 8.46, P = .232). Only 3 of the 43 queried symptoms were endorsed by significantly more (Bonferroni-corrected P < .00116) MTBI patients than controls. Using the same Bonferroni-corrected criteria, 10 of the 43 symptoms were endorsed at a significantly higher severity level by MTBI patients. Overall, the treated MTBI group's symptom complaints diminished from baseline to 3 months post-injury, with relatively few differences remaining between the two groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".